摘要
目的:系统评价高强度间歇训练(high-intensity interval training,HIIT)与中等强度持续性训练(moderate-intensity continuous training,MICT)对2型糖尿病超重或肥胖患者体成分、糖代谢相关指标干预效果,对比两种运动方式的改善效果,为2型糖尿病超重或肥胖患者运动处方的制定提供参考依据。方法:检索The Cochrane Library、PubMed、EMbase、Web of Science、中国知网、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、万方及美国临床试验注册中心数据库,搜集HIIT与MICT对2型糖尿病超重或肥胖患者体成分和糖代谢相关指标干预效果比较的随机对照试验,检索时间为各数据库建库至2022年6月。由2名研究者对所纳入的研究进行筛选、质量评价和数据提取,采用RevMan 5.4软件对结局指标进行Meta分析。结果:①共纳入13项随机对照试验,包括371例患者,所纳入研究整体质量较高。②HIIT组与MICT组对体成分改善效果无显著性差异(体质量:WMD=2.44,95%CI:-3.01-7.89,P>0.05;体质量指数:WMD=0.28,95%CI:-1.21-1.77,P>0.05;腰围:WMD=2.16,95%CI:-2.04-6.35,P>0.05;体脂百分比:WMD=0.47,95%CI:-2.11-3.05,P>0.05);③两组体质量与体质量指数指标“训练周期≥12周”亚组“训练频率≤3次/周”亚组差异有显著性意义(训练周期≥12周亚组:WMD=4.25,95%CI:0.90-7.59,P=0.01;WMD=2.71,95%CI:1.92-3.51,P<0.00001;训练频率≤3次/周亚组:WMD=5.14,95%CI:1.7-8.57,P=0.003;WMD=1.67,95%CI:0.66-2.67,P=0.001);④敏感性分析结果显示,HIIT组与MICT组体脂百分比指标差异有显著性意义(WMD=2.17,95%CI:1.20-3.14,P<0.0001),两组对糖代谢改善效果无显著性差异(空腹血糖:WMD=0.31,95%CI:-0.17-0.79,P>0.05;糖化血红蛋白:WMD=0.01,95%CI:-0.19-0.20,P>0.05;胰岛素抵抗指数:WMD=-0.14,95%CI:-0.71-0.42,P>0.05);⑤亚组分析结果显示,空腹血糖指标在“训练频率≤3次/周”亚组分析中差异有显著性意义(WMD=0.92,95%CI:0.25-1.60,P=0.007);糖化血红蛋白在“训练频率>3次/周”亚
OBJECTIVE:To systematically evaluate the effects of high-intensity interval training(HIIT)and moderate-intensity continuous training(MICT)on body composition and glucose metabolism-related indexes in overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes and to compare the improvement effect of the two exercise modalities,thereby providing a reference basis for the development of exercise prescription for overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes.METHODS:The Cochrane Library,PubMed,EMbase,Web of Science,CNKI,CBM,WanFang,and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of HIIT and MICT interventions on body composition and glucose metabolism-related indicators in overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes.The search was conducted from database inception to June 2022.Meta-analysis of outcome indicators was performed using RevMan 5.4.RESULTS:(1)A total of 13 randomized controlled trials with 371 subjects were included,and the overall quality of the included studies was relatively high.(2)There was no significant difference in the improvement of body composition between HIIT and MICT[body mass:weighted mean difference(WMD)=2.44,95%confidence interval(CI):-3.01-7.89,P>0.05;body mass index:WMD=0.28,95%CI:-1.21-1.77,P>0.05;waist circumference:WMD=2.16,95%CI:-2.04-6.35,P>0.05;body fat percentage:WMD=0.47,95%CI:-2.11-3.05,P>0.05).(3)The results of subgroup analysis showed that there was a significant difference in body mass and body mass index between the“training cycle≥12 weeks”subgroup and the“training frequency≤3 times/week”subgroup(training cycle≥12 weeks subgroup:WMD=4.25,95%CI:0.90-7.59,P=0.01;WMD=2.71,95%CI:1.92-3.51,P<0.00001;training frequency≤3 times/week subgroup:WMD=5.14,95%CI:1.7-8.57,P=0.003;WMD=1.67,95%CI:0.66-2.67,P=0.001).(4)The results of sensitivity analysis showed that there was a significant difference in body fat percentage between the HIIT and MICT groups(WMD=2.17,95%CI:1.20-3.14,P<0.0001),while there was no significant difference
作者
刘仁凡
吕丽婷
伍怡
王璐
Liu Renfan;Lyu Liting;Wu Yi;Wang Lu(The Engineering&Technical College of Chengdu University of Technology,Leshan 614000,Sichuan Province,China;Teaching and Research Section of Sport Anatomy,Chengdu Sport University,Chengdu 610000,Sichuan Province,China)
出处
《中国组织工程研究》
CAS
北大核心
2024年第14期2274-2281,共8页
Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research
基金
国家自然科学基金青年项目(31900848),项目负责人:王璐
成都体育学院运动医学与健康研究所/郑怀贤骨伤研究所2021-2022年创新课题资助(CX21B05),项目负责人:王璐
四川省科技厅青年项目(2022NSFSC1724),项目负责人:王璐。
关键词
高强度间歇训练
中等强度持续训练
2型糖尿病
超重
肥胖
体成分
糖化血红蛋白
空腹血糖
胰岛素抵抗指数
META分析
high-intensity interval training
moderate-intensity continuous training
type 2 diabetes
overweight
obesity
body composition
glycosylated hemoglobin
fasting blood glucose
insulin resistance index
Meta-analysis
